Quote from: Wilhelm on Today at 06:49:14 AM

Quote from: philipma1957 on April 16, 2021, 11:45:04 PM

Quote from: Wilhelm on April 16, 2021, 11:11:02 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on April 16, 2021, 11:02:59 PM

Quote from: Wilhelm on April 16, 2021, 10:53:53 PM

Quote from: Hueristic on April 16, 2021, 10:33:56 PM

Quote

NASA selects SpaceX as its sole provider for a lunar lander

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/04/nasa-selects-spacex-as-its-sole-provider-for-a-lunar-lander/

Well it’s Elon, Easa or Russia...
Russia is kind of a bad political idea....

And why are we going back to the moon... we needs to go to Mars Cool

the reasons for going to the moon are more than just stepping stone to mars, first there maybe some minerals there that are economic to mine, but that's still speculative, to be proven.

most importantly though China has made moves that looks like it is intending to take the "commanding heights" militarily on the moon, this is no shit serious.

we may see the moon, or lunar orbits, cis lunar orbits, earth-moon L1 Lagrange point or earth orbits become the next battlefield.

1. The moon isn’t a stepping stone to Mars. Going direct to Mars saves time money and resources.
2. The moon is geologically dead and mostly made of the same stuff as earth. If it was pure diamond or gold then I’d understand. I believe He3 to be the most interesting...

....

3. Yup it’s showing their big dick again by putting military presence on the moon 🌚

Well gravity says you are so very wrong.
Along with atmosphere or lack of it.

We could shuttle stuff to the moon

big a bigger boat with more fuel as gravity would allow for easier take off. Also moon would be used as a spinning sling shot to boost that rocket ship.

Finally the lack of or very thin atmosphere would along for less friction on take offs and landing.

So If you really want us to go to mars a large basecamp on the moon makes sense.

As for military on the moon the military has always sucked and will always suck. But Leaders love the war games.

Physics says you are wrong... And many experts too...

Building in zero gravity is even easier, and you can build bigger. Why take off twice? Once from earth and once from the moon. Added complexity and risk isn't worth it.

Shuttling stuff into space costs $10000/kg from earth, so if you want to go to the moon (or mars) then you need to make everything there and only pack your necessities.
Having to supply a base camp on the moon is stupendously expensive.

On Mars you can literally make rocket fuel from the atmosphere. The moon you can't.
Mars has everything you need is you can get to it.

The earth has rotation and you don't see us slingshotting into space. It only saves some fuel if you take off from the equator. So that argument is moot.

If you thrust away from earth you might aswell thrust into the Mars gravity field instead of the moons gravity field.

Money says you are wrong... and investors too...

1. One purpose of a Moon settlement will be tourism
2. Before stepping into Mars permanently may be a week on the moon will be a better option.
3. Private companies are ready to provide shuttle services, they just waiting for a “base camp”